Senator Demands Answers from Hospitals That Denied Emergency Reproductive Health Care
Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D-OR) has written to 8 hospitals in states with abortion bans following reports they denied emergency stabilizing care to pregnant women in violation of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA).
EMTALA was signed into law in 1986 and requires all patients received at an emergency room or hospital that receives Medicare funding to provide stabilizing care, irrespective of the ability of the patient to pay. Under EMTALA, emergency treatment can include emergency reproductive health care if a pregnant woman’s life is at risk.
Around half of U.S. states introduced bans on abortions or severely restricted when abortions can be provided, although many states have exceptions to those abortion bans for emergency care when there is a threat to life. Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court, there have been reports of more than 100 women being denied abortion care when they were experiencing a medical emergency such as an ectopic pregnancy or preeclampsia that put their lives at risk.
“Across the country, there are reports that women are being turned away by emergency departments when they seek emergency reproductive health care, even in instances where medical professionals determine that, without such care, the patient is at risk of serious complications, infection, or even death. These women are caught between dangerous state laws that are in clear conflict with – and preempted by – EMTALA,” wrote Sen. Wyden.
Sen Wyden has asked the hospitals to answer questions about their policies and procedures for providing stabilizing care to patients under EMTALA, including the processes that occur when emergency care is sought by pregnant patients in their emergency departments in healthcare scenarios when an abortion would be the appropriate treatment. Sen Wyden has also asked the hospital to explain the procedures for determining whether a pregnant patient has an emergency medical condition, provide a copy of signage advising patients of their rights under EMTALA, a copy of communications to staff regarding hospital protocols and changes to procedures related to state abortion laws, and the support offered to emergency personnel when there is a perceived conflict between the emergency standard of care required under EMTALA and the constraints of the operating state abortion ban.
The consequences of providing abortion care in violation of state law can be severe. Doctors in Texas could face up to 99 years in jail for providing an illegal abortion, and while medical exceptions exist and doctors have a statute they can use in their defense in court, they may still be arrested and have to defend themselves in court. The failure to provide treatment under EMTALA also has severe consequences. Hospitals could face heavy fines and have their Medicare funding put at risk.
“Post Dobbs, it is essential that pregnant patients and their families have the peace of mind that they will be able to receive the necessary, stabilizing care they need and providers are able to deliver appropriate emergency care without fear of personal or professional liability,” wrote Sen. Wyden.
The U.S. Senate Committee on Finance held its first full hearing this week on how state bans on abortion are affecting women’s health care. Testimony was provided by experts, including physicians prevented from providing medically necessary abortion care as well as expert testimony that abortion care is not risk-free for patients.
